Re: Sorting Algorythms

[YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name)]

In article <ab922e64-7be5-472b-aaed-c6095f7a81d2@googlegroups.com>,
gids.rs@sasktel.net wrote:
> 
> Really?  Are you guys serious?
> 
> I didn't ask for advantages or disadvantages of each.\
> Memory should never be an issue.  We are not talking about using an apple I=
> I with only 16, 32 or 48 kb any more.  On computers with limited memory, yo=
> u can never hold enough text for speed to be an issue.
> 
> I bring up a topic for discussion, and you point me to books?
> 
> > Read Knuth, volume 2: Sorting and Searching.
> > It says just about all there is to say about the topic!
> 
> Are you sure about that?  The general sensous is, that it is agreed that Qu=
> icksort (or Quicksort3)(and even Heap and Shell have their speed) is the fa=
> stest sorting algorythm out there right now.  I tell you that I came across=
> a sort that is about 35% faster than even Quicksort, and this does not pee=
> k your interest.
> 
> I guess if the book says it all, and everyone knows all about it, then I do=
>  not need to discuss my algorythm here.

A.  A snotty, whiny attitude won't get you very far in the Newsgroups (nor 
    the world for that matter).

B.  This is an Apple II Newsgroup - although there are people interested in 
    programming here (including me), you'd get better options asking in a
    programming Newsgroup. I don't know how busy these Newsgroups are, but 
    on my useless Newsserver there is:
      alt.comp.programming
      alt.comp.programming.theory
      alt.comp.shareware.programmer
      alt.msdos.programmer
      alt.support.programming
      comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc
      comp.os.msdos.programmer
      comp.programming
    to name just a few of the general ones.

C.  You asked about sorting techniques, and people gave you links and a
    book (shock, horror! You might have to actually read something) which
    which have such information - there's zero point rehashing here what's 
    already been covered elsewhere.

D.  Only lazy, foolish programmers think memory is "never an issue". Such
    silliness is one of the causes of today's over-bloated applications.

Judging by all of the above (and the spelling mistakes), your algorithim
is likely to be buggy, over-bloated rubbish that does really work
properly, so no, please don't discuss your algorithm here.